hughes and johnson to lead the way

i have been really impressed by both hughes and johnson leading into the ashe's series.hughes has already proven himself in english condition's scoring over 800 run's for middlesex in his little stint over there and mitch took 4 for not many i think in a lead up match over there.i can smell a aussie onslaught coming on for the next few month's.there will be no open top bus and no honour's from the queen after this series

What is everyone expecting Hughes to average this Ashes and what is the cut-off mark for a player to have a good series average, because for mine an average of 40-45 will be considered good this series.

I think Hughes will do well. Not the Bradman-esque form that people are probably expecting from him, but he will more than likely get a couple of 100's, some 50's, probably a few <10's and average around 50-55.

What is everyone expecting Hughes to average this Ashes and what is the cut-off mark for a player to have a good series average, because for mine an average of 40-45 will be considered good this series.

less than 35 is poor
35-40 is okay
40-50 is good
50-60 is great
more than 60 is sublime

I think Hughes will do well. Not the Bradman-esque form that people are probably expecting from him, but he will more than likely get a couple of 100's, some 50's, probably a few <10's and average around 50-55.

im not expecting bradman type form,but he should do very well.i know this may sound a little silly,but if hughe's is on around 40 or 50,and the wicket is turning even on the first day,which we have been hearing about a couple of the pommy wicket's[especially cardiff the first game]i wonder if they will bring on early spin as we have been hearing a lot about swan in particular and if so will hughe's handle a quality spinner [asuming swan is quality,time will tell]because i would bank on hughes taking to monty panasar all day long. the reason i ask that question is if england are banking on there pace attack to get rid of hughe's i suspect it will be a failure in most of his ten atempt's at the crease

Just as important how Katich, Ponting, Clarke, Hussey and Haddin perform than the fortunes of Phil Hughes.

Just as important how Lee, Clark, Siddle (possibly Hauritz, Hilfenhaus and McDonald) perform as the way Johnson bowls

Two great cricketers, but not enough to carry the Australian team over an entire Ashes series. Australia have never been a team to hang its fortunes on certain cricketers to perform.

Johnson to take 20-25 wickets at a tick under 30. Hughes to score 1 century, and have an impact in a couple other innings for an average of 45.

Yeah, was just going to come back in and edit and say that I don't think that Johnson's performance will be what wins Australia the series. It may well put Australia in advantageous positions, but it will be what the other three bowlers do when he's not bowling that will determine how effective Australia's bowling will end up be. That was the biggest difference between the series' at home and away in South Africa.

Yeah, was just going to come back in and edit and say that I don't think that Johnson's performance will be what wins Australia the series. It may well put Australia in advantageous positions, but it will be what the other three bowlers do when he's not bowling that will determine how effective Australia's bowling will end up be. That was the biggest difference between the series' at home and away in South Africa.

Shane Warne managed 40 wickets in 2005, and yet England remained on top for a large majority of play. It required all four bowlers to be performing for sustained pressure to really exist.

Johnson in South Africa looked an even better bowler than his performances in Australia. Largely because he didn't have to carry the attack, and play both as the stock bowler and the strike bowler.

If Johnson ends the Ashes series with 20 wickets at a little under 30. That is a good result as it means he hasn't had to bowl the bulk of the overs. Probably means one or two other bowlers have taken 20-25 wickets at similar averages.

Shane Warne managed 40 wickets in 2005, and yet England remained on top for a large majority of play. It required all four bowlers to be performing for sustained pressure to really exist.

Exactly; compared to Flintoff who performed similarly, but had the back-up of Jones which Warne didn't really have, outside of the first Test. Says something that the two Tests that England won were the two when McGrath didn't play, as he was the only reliable support he had all tour.

5 tests is a long time. Hughes to come good IMO, average 55-60ish, 2 hundreds, lots of contributions. Johnson to average 25-30, 25+ wickets if he stays fit, expect him to be excellent at mopping up the tail with his extra pace, a couple of 50s too. That said his inswinger looked unplayable in SA so a sub 25 average is very possible, especially with the likes of Bopara and Pietersen prone to playing around their front pad. Think Cook will struggle against him too.

Hughes has a great series and people expect him to do that in every series!

He is only 20, let him develop.

I think he'll get 2 centuries (Lord's defo) and maybe a couple of 50's but don't expect something like 4 centuries including a double-century and 3 x 50's cos that wont happen.

I must say the quality of bowling at county level isn't great and the Lord's wicket he scored a century in the CC on was a batting one but the wicket for the test vs the West Indies was very much even, and possibly leaning towards the seamers.

As for Johnson, I think he'll be the leading wicket taker in the series but it's the other bowlers who you need to worry about. Siddle and Hilfenhaus haven't played a test here yet, Clark and Lee are coming off injuries and Hauritz...... er..... nevermind.